New lit review post, this one on #COVID19 antibody testing.https://srconstantin.github.io/2020/04/27/antibody-testing.html …
-
-
Also nope. There's no evidence *in COVID-19*, but I found very consistent evidence across 6 different viruses, including a coronavirus, that higher virus-specific antibody levels predict lower risk of symptomatic infection with that virus.
Show this thread -
There are virus studies in which a *detectable* antibody titer can still precede symptomatic (re)infection, so I wouldn't go around assuming that a positive test result on one of those yes/no drive-thru tests means you literally can't get COVID19.
Show this thread -
But is, for instance, antibody response a plausible initial proxy for testing whether a vaccine candidate is protective against COVID19? Yeah, probably. It's a standard endpoint in the development of other viral vaccines.
Show this thread -
Also, it depends what the antibody tests are being used for. As a population measure of how many people have been infected with COVID-19? They're good, PLEASE DO MOAR ANTIBODY TESTS.
Show this thread -
As a guide to clinical treatment of individual patients? Probably not great, since they'll show up negative even in infected patients for the first two weeks after symptom onset.
Show this thread -
As a guide to identifying who needs to be quarantined? Again, not ideal, because they'll miss newly infected patients (who are at their most contagious) but maybe better than nothing.
Show this thread -
My general heuristic of "don't trust claims by known COVID-19 Pollyannas" seems pretty vindicated by the facts here.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That was the WHO I think? They retracted it later that day
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.